VU Research Portal

(1)

VU Research Portal

The Power of Rituals van den Ende, A.L.

2015

document version

Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Link to publication in VU Research Portal

citation for published version (APA)

van den Ende, A. L. (2015). The Power of Rituals: A Study of Transition Rituals in the Life Cycle of Complex

Construction Projects. CPI – KONINKLIJKE WÖHRMANN.

General rights

Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain

• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?

Take down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

E-mail address:

vuresearchportal.ub@vu.nl

(2)

THE POWER OF RITUALS

A Study of Transition Rituals in the Life Cycle of

Complex Construction Projects

(3)

Reading committee

prof. dr. Martin Kornberger prof. dr. Kristina Lauche prof. dr. Jonas Sӧderlund prof. dr. Marcel Veenswijk assoc. prof. dr. Herman Tak

This research has received financial support from Next Generation Infrastructures (NGInfra) grant no. 2.31.VUA.

Cover photograph: Peter Bijkerk

Printed by CPI – KONINKLIJKE WÖHRMANN

(4)

VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT

The Power of Rituals

A Study of Transition Rituals in the Life Cycle of Complex Construction Projects

ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan

de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op gezag van de rector magnificus

prof. dr. V. Subramaniam, in het openbaar te verdedigen ten overstaan van de promotiecommissie van de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen op woensdag 25 november 2015 om 13.45 uur

in de aula van de universiteit, De Boelelaan 1105

door

(5)

(6)

Preface

We all practice rituals that mark important transitions and milestones in our lives, such as birthdays, graduations, weddings, and funerals, to name a few common examples. Rituals offer us a bounded space and time in which we can make the ordinary extraordinary, to commemorate our past, to become aware of our present, and to envision our future. Upon completing this dissertation, knowing that I would soon have to legitimize my work during the PhD defense ritual, I began to reflect on my own past and the path that took me to this present moment.

During my Bachelor study from 2006 to 2009, I didn’t yet know what I wanted to be. Because I preferred the social sciences, I enrolled in various courses in the fields of psychology, sociology, and anthropology. I specifically remember an anthropology course about the Russian transition after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The course was given by Dr. Herman Tak, an associate professor who is also a member of the reading committee of this dissertation nine years later. I was intrigued by the critical and insightful perspective of anthropology, giving insight into how people continuously reconstruct and renegotiate their culture in transforming social, political, and environmental contexts. The message I received is that reality is never fixed and the complexity of humans, and – in the words of Clifford Geertz – the intricate webs of significance that they themselves have spun, cannot be truly simplified, generalized, or quantified. This inspired me to become an anthropologist.

Coincidentally, during this time, my parents moved to Russia for my father’s work. They moved to Sakhalin Island, situated in Siberia just north of Japan. My parents would live here for five years while my father worked for Sakhalin Energy; the first liquefied natural gas project in Russia initiated by an international consortium between foreign shareholders and the Russian Federation. With a climate that reaches minus 20 degrees Celsius, a poor infrastructure, and a community prone to detest foreigners, Sakhalin is labelled as one of the most difficult places for expatriates to live. Quite honestly, I strongly doubted whether I would ever visit my parents there since it did not seem very inviting. I was wrong. I did and it would have a significant impact on my path to this present moment.

(7)

an organization, but I had trouble deciding on what and where. Then I read about the research specialty of Prof. Dr. Alfons van Marrewijk: “cross-cultural collaboration in infrastructure megaprojects,” his field description stated. Without having a clue about what I wanted to study, and never having met Alfons before, I stumbled into his office and started to tell about my father who worked for a megaproject in Siberia where he, along with many other expatriates, collaborated with Russians. Alfons got very excited and convincingly encouraged me to take this rare opportunity to study such an interesting cross-cultural interface in such a remote, exotic and difficult to access place. “Oh great” I remember thinking, “now I have to do research in Siberia and live with my parents for three months.” I already lived on my own then for some years and did not think I would live under the roof of my parents again, not to mention in the Russian Far East. I was wrong. I did, and this also had a significant impact on my path to this point.

Alfons became my supervisor and in 2010 I went to Sakhalin Island to do fieldwork. Being given the opportunity not only to research but also to live on Sakhalin Island was a memorable experience. From the moment I arrived on the airport I realized this wasn’t the typical travelers’ destination. The surroundings were cold, grey and harsh, with an implicit beauty. Residual of the Soviet era, statues and images of Lenin could be found everywhere throughout the island, and ‘dachas’ or Russian country (vacation) houses were scattered in the forests. Everything was covered in layers of snow and colossal mountain ranges surrounded towns and cities. Rivers, lakes and even seas were frozen solid permitting ice-fishers to pursue their hobbies, and people were dressed in thick furry coats, hats and snow boots. In this fascinating place I was able to collect plenty of data on cross-cultural dynamics in this multinational project. Alfons was pleased with the end result and subsequently asked me to continue research as a PhD student on cultural phenomena in infrastructure projects. I never expected I would become a PhD researcher, especially in the organizational settings of construction projects with which I had no affinity. I was wrong. I did, and this would have the most significant impact on my path to this present moment.

(8)

(an underground railway project and one of the cases of this research) who told me a story about a recent ritual event. She explained that the project organization had communicated to the residents of Delft that they were going to close the bike tunnel connecting the neighborhood behind the (now former) train station to the center of the city. In response to this information, an elderly citizen sent a letter to express her grief about the loss of this tunnel which had been there since she was a little girl. She remembered biking through the tunnel with her sister to school every day, falling off her bike and injuring her knee and even sharing her first kiss there. She wanted to bid farewell to the tunnel in honor of her memories. In view of that, they organized a public farewell ritual for the residents for which they built a ‘musing bench’ from recycled wood, now covered in signatures and proverbs, to be placed against the wall next to the tunnel’s soon-to-be closed entrance. During the event, after placing the bench, the alderman of Delft gave a speech about how the bench offers citizens the occasion to muse about how the city used to be and envision how it would become. Thereafter, poetry was recited in commemoration of the tunnel and an art piece was revealed featuring forget-me-nots, to be hung above the bench.

This anecdote provides a glimpse into this dissertation about how rituals that mark transitions in the life cycle of complex construction projects enable those involved or affected to attribute significance to it. It also serves to show that construction projects, far from being inhuman and solely technical, are all about people. Upon completing the life cycle of this research project and in memory of the path I travelled to get here, I want to share that extraordinary things can happen or appear in the most unexpected places. To experience them, we need to go against our plans, step outside our comfort zone, seek out the unfamiliar, pursue what we thought we would never do, and open up to that with which we initially have no affinity. Therein lies the power of gaining knowledge, changing perspectives, and transforming philosophies.

(9)

Acknowledgement

I did not walk this path alone and I could not have reached this present moment without the support of various people to whom I would like to express my utmost gratitude. First, I would like to thank my promotor, Alfons van Marrewijk, and co-promotor, Kees Boersma, for guiding my research trajectory, providing me with shrewd feedback, and bringing me back to earth when I was wandering off into distant theoretical complexes. I would especially like to thank Alfons for his encouragement and enthusiasm over the years and for giving me the opportunity to do this PhD research. I also wish to thank the reading committee Herman Tak, Marcel Veenswijk, Kristina Lauche, Martin Kornberger, and Jonas Sӧderlund for taking the time to read, assess and approve my dissertation, and permitting me the chance to defend my work. Besides, I want to thank all the organizations and people who made this research possible, such as the TU Delft, Next Generation Infrastructures, ‘Rijkswaterstaat’, ‘Kennis in het Groot’, and the members and associates from the project cases of my study, Room for the River, the North-South line of Amsterdam, Railzone Delft, and the Hanzeline.

Furthermore, I wish to acknowledge all the editors and reviewers of conferences, academic journals and special issues who helped me develop and publish my research papers, including, but not limited to, Tuomas Ahola, Brian Hobbs, Michael Rowe, Manuela Nocker, Darren McCabe, Alex Wright, Jean-Pascal Gond, Laure Cabantous, Joachim Thiel and Gernot Grabher. I would also like to thank my colleagues, both in Amsterdam and abroad, for their support, feedback and friendship; my friend, Ko Cusveller, for helping me edit my work; and my paranymphs, Sander Merkus and Sasha Kovalev, for helping me complete my dissertation and standing by me during the defense.

Moreover, I especially want to express gratitude to my mother and father, Janine and Leendert van den Ende, for giving me all the support, confidence, and opportunities a daughter could ever wish for, for inspiring me to follow my dreams, and for standing by me during the good times and the difficult times. I also want to thank my brother, Lex van den Ende, for always being a good role model and for making me laugh, as well as my extended family, my grandma, aunts, uncles and cousins, for their kinship. Last but not least, I would like to thank all my close friends, you know who you are, for having my back and enjoying life with me to the fullest. I hope we will share many more adventures together in the future.

(10)

List of tables, figures and photos

Table 1: Project cases and ritual research sites 14

Table 2: Interview sample and details 16

Table 3: Summary of research papers, authors, journals and status 31 Table 4: Instance and level of ritualization during project life cycle 59 Table 5: Characteristics of transition rituals in construction projects 65 Table 6: Codes and corresponding data of ritual performances 78 Table 7: Levels of collecting and analyzing empirical data on sociomateriality 101 Table 8: Sociomaterial entanglement at different levels of analysis 115 Table 9: Multi-level analysis of sociomateriality in an organization of study 118

Table 10: Shock-absorbing platforms 129

Table 11: Summary of research paper titles, aims, and questions 173 Table 12: List of conferences attended and papers presented by author 185

Figure 1: Map RR (Room for the River project) 18

Figure 2: Map NS (North-South Line of Amsterdam project) 21

Figure 3: Map RD (Railzone Delft project) 24

Figure 4:Map HZ (Hanzeline project) 26

Figure 5: Kaleidoscopic lens for conceptualizing ritual 40

Figure 6: Postcard ‘Never-South Line’ 106

Photo 1: Author doing fieldwork 15

Photos 2 and 3: RR kick-off Deventer 19

Photos 4 and 5: RR kick-off Zwolle 20

Photos 6 and 7: NS launch phase 1 and 2 22

Photos 8 and 9: NS launch phase 3 23

Photos 10 and 11: RD milestone celebration ‘tour de tunnel’ 24 Photos 12 and 13: RD milestone celebration reaching the top 25

Photos 14 and 15: HZ internal project delivery 27

Photos 16 and 17: HZ external project delivery 28

Photos 18 and 19: Builders in RD and citizens in RR 66

Photos 20 and 21: VIPs and the Queen in HZ 66

Photos 22 and 23: Statue of Santa Barbara and engineer choir in NS 81 Photo 24: Children reciting poetry at RR in Deventer 84 Photos 25 and 26: Children revealing names of TBM in NS 85 Photos 27 and 28: Enacting a point of no return in RR and RD 86

Photo 29: Water cannons during Nieuwmarkt riots 102

Photo 30: Communication strategy ‘give the TBM a face’ 113

Photo 31: Day of construction at NS 138

Photo 32: ‘Here we are now’ arrow NS 140

(14)

1

Chapter 1: General introduction

Around 16:30 on Thursday the 28th of April 2011, I witnessed the baptism and name-giving of a tunnel-boring machine used to excavate part of the North-South metro line of Amsterdam. The project organization performed this ritual to launch the third phase of tunnel construction, attended by a large group of project actors, state officials and members of the press. It became clear that the ritual had commenced when a Catholic Priest dressed in traditional robes came to the fore at the dark, cold construction site reaching 25 meters underground; staging a colossal machine which would soon eat away the earth to create a gigantic burrow under the city. The priest started by imparting the significance of the ritual he would perform, while presenting a statue of Santa Barbara; a Patron Saint acknowledged by the Catholic Church as the protector of harm and later espoused by mine and tunnel workers as such. He explained that even though he would physically bless the statue and the machine, he would emblematically yet truly be blessing the tunnel workers who necessitated protection. As he recited texts from the bible, he blessed the water in a shiny goblet into holy water, with which he then blessed the Santa Barbara statue. Afterward, eight engineers standing next to the priest recited a traditional German mining song – Glück Auf Close – while the statue of Santa Barbara was carried by one of the construction workers and delicately placed in a decorated glass cupboard hanging on the wall next to the machine. Subsequently, the name of the machine would be revealed. After the alderman of Amsterdam smashed a bottle of champagne against the machine followed the theatrical release of a giant poster displaying the name ‘Molly’ in big bold letters. The name was female as this belonged to the tradition, and it was chosen by a group of school children from Amsterdam who also participated in the ceremony. At that moment, the Priest came to the fore once again and blessed the machine just as he had blessed the statue, finishing with the eminent words “in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit.” At the end of the ritual, in the midst of a fascinated and clapping audience, all attendees and participants further indulged themselves with food and drinks in the party tent set up alongside the abyss of the construction site, striking up vivid conversations in reflection of the bizarre yet intriguing phenomenon they had just collectively experienced (Fieldnotes, 28 April, 2011).

(15)

2

To start my investigation, I first explored prior research on rituals in organization studies to determine their research relevance. Rituals are generally understood as social practices that are bounded, recurring and serial (Trice and Beyer, 1993), and which confer symbolic meaning to mundane activities and materials when carried out in specific, predetermined settings (Smith and Stewart, 2011; Gbadamosi, 2005). In simpler terms, they are distinct, episodic enactments that express and/or influence (cultural) values and beliefs (Islam et al., 2006). Examples include (annual) meetings, workshops or conferences, induction and basic training, organizational development activities, collective bargaining, business dinners and office Christmas parties (Deal and Kennedy, 1988; Catasús and Johed, 2007; Smith and Stewart, 2011; Islam and Zyphur, 2009; Trice and Beyer, 1984; Johnson et al., 2010; Rosen, 1988; Lampel and Meyer, 2008). They usually mark important transition points, life cycles, or the history of organizations and prescribe and reinforce significant events (Martin, 2002). Moreover, rituals can serve as communication and learning schemes, helping to direct thoughts, feelings and behavior (Smith and Stewart, 2011; Cheal, 1992; Rothenbuhler, 1998), and attracting the attention of its participants towards that which is or should be regarded as important (Anand and Watson, 2004). Due to their generic integrative character, they are attributed various social functions such as enhancing social coherence, solidarity, loyalty, and commitment. Additionally, they can provide a window to maintain, influence, or transform organizational culture (Smith and Stewart, 2011; Islam and Zyphur, 2009; Trice and Beyer, 1993). On the whole, rituals are practices ‘made special’, also referred to as the ritualization of practice which privileges and distinguishes them from ordinary, everyday practice (Bell, 1992; 2009).

(16)

3

construction projects where change and transitions are enacted with difficulty due the complex and fragmented nature of construction work (Bresnen et al., 2005a; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008; Marshall, 2003). Projects are contested organizational constructs concerning various sub-projects, stages and/or phases, typified by overlap, time delay and pressure, and involving multiple workforces and stakeholders. Not only do these features result in a high level of ambiguity and uncertainty among project actors, they also may lead to the collapse of many project-based alliances (Marshall and Bresnen, 2013; Cicmil and Gaggiotti, 2009; Nocker, 2006; Atkinson et al., 2006; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008). In this context, this study will focus on what I will call transition rituals to refine the focus of investigation.

With the exception of several studies (e.g. Cova and Salle, 2000; Löfgren, 2007; Eskerod and Blichfeldt, 2005; Berg et al., 2000) rituals have yet to be addressed in the field of project management. Perhaps, this is because “rituals seem to clash with the organizational drive for rationality, effectiveness, efficiency, and goal attainment” (Smith and Stewart, 2011: 11); this being a common reason why rituals were understudied in organizations in the past. However, extant research in both organization and project management studies indicates that rituals have pertinent symbolic and strategic significance (e.g. Eskerod and Blichfeldt, 2005; Löfgren, 2004; Johnson et al., 2010; Smith and Stewart, 2011; Cova and Salle, 2000). That is to say, rituals are dually significant practices having on the one side a symbolic and expressive dimension through which values, beliefs and behavior are conveyed or formed. While on the other side, rituals have a tangible character where they are performed strategically to accomplish or establish something (Islam and Zyphur, 2009; Smith and Stewart, 2011; Johnson, 2007; Schatzki, 2010; Sillince and Barker, 2012). As such, rituals are not only representative of something, but they can do something (Bell, 2009; Alexander et al., 2006; Koschmann and McDonald, 2015).

Research aim and question

Because I believe the study of transition rituals in project settings can generate valuable insights, the main aim of this research is to provide an in-depth understanding of the practice and meaning of transition rituals in the context of complex construction projects. Consequently, the main research question addressed is ‘how are transition rituals practiced

by project actors and what do they mean in the context of complex construction projects?’

(17)

4

organizational actors, the latter underlines the corporeal and material practices of organizational actors in a field of study. This is line with the aim of the research to explore both the meaning and practice of rituals in complex construction projects.

To operationalize the research, multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork was carried out. According to Pink et al. (2013: 1) ethnography is becoming increasingly popular and is “emerging as part of a repertoire of approaches to understanding the construction industry.” For this study, participant-observation was conducted during eight transition rituals in four different construction projects in the Netherlands, including two project kick-offs in a river expansion project; two sub-project phase launches in an underground metro project; two milestone celebrations in an underground railway project; and two project completions/deliveries in an aboveground railway project. Additionally, participant-observation was carried out at various sites in the four construction projects, such as by visiting information centers, project office buildings, and the actual construction sites via open days, excursions and tours. Also, 58 in-depth interviews were held with diverse project participants, including communication advisors, contractors, constructors, and state officials. These methods were chosen to observe and analyze how transition rituals are practiced in the field of study and to investigate the meaning attributed to them by various actors.

The structure of this introduction is as follows: First, the context of construction projects will be addressed because the practice and meaning of a ritual depends on the context in which it is practiced (Bell, 1992; Bell, 2009; Islam and Zyphur, 2009). Then, the research approaches will be further elucidated, being an interpretive and practice-based approach to project management. Next the methods will be explained and the description of the project cases will be provided. Lastly, a description and comparison of the research articles will be given. Subsequently, in Chapter 2, the theoretical framework will be provided to theorize rituals and introduce the conceptual lenses selected and utilized to build theory in various sub-fields of organization and project management studies.

The context of complex construction projects

(18)

5

partners. Therefore, megaprojects are perceived as unconventional, necessitating special authorization, funding, revenues, land acquisition, and legal actions by various levels of government (Altshuler and Luberoff, 2003; Dille and Söderlund, 2011; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008). Such projects generally require complex construction integration and technical, resource and material management characterized by a long time frame and numerous interfaces among multiple contractors and third parties to deliver some agreed outcome (Greiman, 2013; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008). In sum, they comprise vast complexes characterized by a variety of interests and purposes, different financing techniques, technical innovation, a mixture of public and private sector initiators, and multiple stakeholders (Lehrer and Laidley, 2008). Justifiably, these features form a strenuous context within which project partners must function and interact on a daily basis.

To determine the main factors that typify a construction project as complex, a literature review was carried out focusing on the complexity of the project context and process (e.g. Cicmil and Marshall, 2005; Bresnen et al., 2005b; Pryke and Smyth, 2006; Li and Guo, 2011; Söderlund, 2013). Consequently, four main themes that typically characterize construction projects as complex repeatedly emerged from the literature; a project’s (1) laborious collaboration, (2) temporal organizing, (3) difficult change, and (4) interface with the environment. These themes will be addressed and resurface in the upcoming chapters featuring the research papers and be further discussed in the concluding chapter of this dissertation.

(19)

6

forthcoming), where culture is the result of the social construction and meaning attribution of people within and around a project (Alvesson, 2002). Understanding project organizations as complex cultures acknowledges the sub-cultures, power relations, rituals, myths, artifacts, and spatial settings as essential features of the project process (Martin, 2002).

Secondly, the temporal organizing of a megaproject is a defining feature of a project process. This is because complex projects are multifaceted organizational constructs that are constantly transforming and evolving over time (Söderlund, 2013). According to Marshall and Bresnen (2013: 112) the spatial and temporal patterning of project work is what distinguishes a project from other organizations; “particularly its time-bound nature; they have ostensibly clear start and end points.” In this sense, construction projects can be viewed as a temporary collection of organizations, groups and individuals having a life cycle (Pink et al., 2013). This life cycle can typically be divided into various phases such as initiation, decision-making, preparation, realization and delivery, which are aligned to spatial and temporal planning schemes of the project (Bresnen et al., 2005a; Van Marrewijk, 2007). However, the interface of a project’s step from one phase to the next is ambiguous, difficult and time consuming (Engwall, 2003), comprising different actors such as project managers and employees, contractors and constructors, as well as state officials and other stakeholders (Van Marrewijk, 2010). Therefore, a main issue is the ever-changing, non-linear, and often unpredictable process of a megaproject (Cicmil and Hodgson, 2006; Maaninen-Olsson and Müllern, 2009). Project actors experience difficulty in organizing and coordinating the complex project process which is often comprised of intricate and drawn-out phase transitions with a series of overlapping sub-projects and phases (Pink et al., 2013; Van Marrewijk et al., 2008). To facilitate this process, rather than relying on instrumental approaches, such as the use of temporal models and pacing devices, researchers call for more interpretive approaches to account for the social and symbolic facet of transitions in the project life cycle, such as signing contracts and reaching milestones and deadlines (Eskerod and Blichfeldt, 2005; Cicmil, 2006; Löfgren, 2007; Söderlund, 2005).

(20)

7

witnessed a variety of new management initiatives. These initiatives seek the ‘best’ or ‘good’ practices for project implementation. However, there remain gaps in our understanding of the manifold social dynamics and issues involved in project implementation and change, comprising issues of power, politics, culture, interest and context which are often disregarded (Hodgson and Cicmil, 2006; Söderlund, 2005; Maaninen-Olsson and Müllern, 2009). Therefore, various researchers argue project management theory needs to distance itself from dominant, rationalistic traditions and assumptions (Blomquist et al., 2010; Bresnen et al., 2005a). Specifically, there needs to be an alternative approach to ‘good’ or ‘best’ practice (Hodgson and Cicmil, 2006), such as the contextual study of situated events and social and cultural practices that are important for implementing change in projects (Blomquist et al., 2010; Bresnen et al., 2005a; Van Marrewijk, 2007; Söderlund, 2005). Moreover, according to Hancock (2006), the spatial and temporal mediation of change must be taken into account at the symbolic and aesthetic level to account for the narratives and artifacts of organizational change within its broader socio-cultural environment.

(21)

8

flexible in terms of modifying their process and procedures accordingly (Dewey and Davis, 2013; Diaz Orueta and Fainstein, 2008). It is pertinent for initiators and implementers to adopt an “everyone gains” rhetoric and the paradigm of “do no harm”, which is the idea that a megaproject should only ensue if their negative impact is trivial or significantly moderated (Altshuler and Luberoff, 2003; Lehrer and Laidley, 2008).

In sum, issues of power, politics and conflicting interests should be acknowledged in the megaproject process (Clegg and Kreiner, 2013) and a democratic approach to integrating a project in its (urban) environment should be sought after (Maaninen-Olsson and Müllern, 2009). Accordingly, complex construction projects should be seen as temporal, organizational and social arrangements that should be studied within their historical and environmental context (Kreiner, 1995; Packendorff, 1995; Lundin and Söderholm, 1995; Söderlund, 2013). Attention to multiple cultures, interests, participation and micro practices in the specific project context will give insight into how the social and environmental impact caused by megaprojects can be mediated and rebalanced (Maaninen-Olsson and Müllern, 2009; Manning, 2008; Grabher and Thiel, 2014; Söderlund, 2005).

To refine the scope of this dissertation, this research will focus on transition rituals as micro practices taking place at various transition points during the project life cycle to unearth what significance they have in the context of complex construction projects as described above. As maintained by Kunda (1992: 94), “the meaning of ritual is context-dependent; it is always an interpretive empirical question.”

Research approach The interpretive approach

(22)

9

epistemology, inductive reasoning, and exploratory qualitative techniques, emphasizing subjectivity and contextual relevance rather than objectivity. While in the former paradigm practice is based on efficiency, planning, control and an interest in structure, in the latter practice is typified by participation, communication, learning, and an interest in culture and social processes.

Engwall (2003) agrees that theories on project management have been dominated by a singular perspective which views project management as a lonely, universal unit of analysis, calling for more in-depth and contextual research. Hodgson and Cicmil (2006: 111), too, challenge the dominant, functionalist approach to project management and express their disapproval of the long-standing pragmatic emphasis on planning and control. Instead they call for more critical approaches to project management “with the aim of creating new possibilities for thinking about, researching and developing our understanding of the field as practiced.” Moreover, Bresnen and Marshall (2000: 230) assert that scant research to date has explored the social aspects of project dynamics “despite the fact that commentators place considerable emphasis upon the importance of changing attitudes, improving interpersonal relationships and transforming organizational cultures.” According to various authors (e.g. Cicmil, 2006; Hodgson and Cicmil, 2006; Engwall, 2003; Clegg and Kreiner, 2013; Pink et al., 2013; Pollack, 2007; Söderlund, 2005), instrumental approaches have been far too overbearing, suggesting that humanistic or interpretive approaches should be emphasized and further developed in this field.

(23)

10

The researcher must therefore attempt to find out “how people give meaning and order to their experience within specific contexts, through interpretive and symbolic acts, forms and processes” (Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006: 14). This pursuit suites the study of rituals well, especially because to this date, “little is known about how organizational members interpret rituals” (Smith and Stewart, 2011: 17).

The practice approach

In conjunction with an interpretive approach, a practice-based approach is used in this dissertation. The concept of practice and how it should be interpreted and approached is an important issue which has generally been left out of (project) management studies (Söderlund, 2005). In organization studies, practice-based approaches focus on the tangible actions and activities in organizations in contrast with the traditional reductionist approach which focuses mainly on static and formal aspects while neglecting the manifold practices (Geiger, 2009). Hence, within the last decade the field of (project) management studies underwent a ‘practice turn’ where the question ‘what do people actually do in an organization?’ gained increasing interest (Nicolini et al., 2003; Blomquist et al., 2010; Schatzki et al., 2001). Subsequently, various practice-based approaches emerged which, according to Geiger (2009), can be roughly divided into two camps: practice as what actors do, and practice as an epistemic-normative concept. While the former focuses more on individual activities, the latter regards practice as a collective, social category. Because this research is interested in the practice of rituals as a social phenomenon, I adopt the latter understanding.

(24)

11

When taking a practice-based approach to (project) management studies, it is important to consider materials by the same token as they go hand-in-hand with practices. According to Orlikowski (2007), materiality and spatial settings are crucial in the understanding of practices and how they can change, transform, or be modified. That is to say, material objects, such as technological apparatuses, tools, and workplace space and design resemble important artifacts enabling practices to be accomplished (Nicolini et al., 2003). In infrastructure projects the most advanced technological innovations, instruments and machines are used for planning and construction. Hence, one might assume that a material or technological focus is central and often seen as independent from social phenomena. However, this dissertation supports the notion that the material should not be seen as separate from the social as they are incessantly intertwined (Dale, 2005; Pfaffenberger, 1992; Orlikowski, 2007; Leonardi, 2012). As Dale (2005: 641) explains, a conceptualization of sociomateriality is developed “whereby social processes and structures and material process and structures are seen as mutually enacting.”

The concept of sociomateriality encapsulates the sociality of human technological activity and materiality, where artifacts are seen as not only having an instrumental dimension, but simultaneously as having a social and symbolic dimension. Orlikowski (2000) reminds us that all materiality is social in that it is created through social processes, and states that artifacts continue to evolve over time. Therefore, Leonardi (2012: 42) defines sociomateriality as the enactment of a particular set of activities that meld materiality with institutions, norms, discourse and all other phenomena we typically define as social. To uncover their implicit social significance, it is essential to humanize, socialize and localize materials with a focus on how actors draw on social and cultural elements of daily work and life to make sense of and give meaning to their practices and materials (Pfaffenberger, 1992). As will be demonstrated in the findings of this dissertation, the concept of sociomateriality becomes relevant and tangible in showing how project actors humanize their material artifacts to attribute meaning to their work practice during transition rituals.

General methodology

(25)

12

will detect overlap in methodological information and the description and analysis of case studies. By choosing the format of research articles, this editorial issue could not be evaded. I therefore wish to ask the reader to take all chapters as independent yet closely interrelated texts. Though the methodology and analyses will coincide, they will nonetheless be further specified and refined depending on the concepts and theory used and developed in each paper. Below I will first share the general methodology and analysis of the research as a whole to give a universal impression. Thereafter, the methodology and analysis of each article will be further explicated and systematized in the upcoming chapters.

Ethnographic approach

This research focuses on the practice of transition rituals and their meaning according to the project actors who organize and participate in them. To study this, a qualitative, ethnographic fieldwork approach has been taken. Importantly, this “can generate fresh insights into the social, cultural and material ways that the [construction] industry and conditions of work in it are experienced and played out” (Pink et al., 2013: 3). Ethnographic fieldwork is a research strategy to describe, interpret and explain behavior, meaning and cultural products of persons involved in a limited field by direct data collection of researchers who are physically present (Yanow and Schwartz-Shea, 2006). The aim is to give an emphatic understanding of the habitual activities of employees and to describe the connections among these employees within a specific context (Bate, 1997; Ybema et al., 2009). In this sense, ethnography is contextual because behavior cannot be fully comprehended outside of the context in which it is situated, meaning that actors must be placed within their organizational setting. In this way, micro-level and macro-level perspectives are integrated. It is also processual because organizational culture and practices are not seen as static and fixed entities but, rather, as processes that are principally political since meanings are continuously renegotiated and redefined over time (Bate, 1997). Furthermore, it is actor-centered because “instead of asking, ‘What do I see these people doing?’ [the researcher] must ask, ‘What do these people see themselves doing?’” (Bate, 1997: 1160). This method suites the interpretive paradigm as it assumes that knowledge can only be generated and understood from the point of view of the people who live and work in a particular setting (Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006). Ethnography has been a rare method in the construction industry, though more recently it is becoming an acclaimed approach to understanding and theorizing this field (Pink et al., 2013; Smits and Van Marrewijk, 2012).

(26)

13 Research methods

Fieldwork was conducted over a three-year period between summer 2010 and summer 2013. To allow for systematic operationalization, four research steps were taken: a theoretical review, a desk study, participant-observation, and in-depth interviewing. I aimed for the triangulation of information, referring to the involvement and comparison of different kinds of data and/or methods to ensure the quality and comprehensiveness of the research (Bailey, 2007).

According to Yanow and Schwartz-Shea (2006) ethnographic research depends largely on prior theoretical understandings. In this dissertation a variety of literature in the fields of project management, organization science, anthropology, and sociology has been constructive in helping to research and understand the mechanisms and significance of transition rituals practiced in project settings. The theoretical review mainly concerned the study of rituals in social science and organization science, and the study of the project context and process in project management studies. Furthermore, this dissertation engages a variety of theoretical debates depending on the topic and organizational field of the research articles such as theory on transitions and temporal organizing in projects organizations (see Chapter 3), Strategy-as-Practice theory and performativity theory (see Chapter 4); sociomateriality theory (see Chapter 5) and theory on the complex context of urban megaprojects (see Chapter 6).

Subsequently, the desk study was essential to gain a thorough historical and contextual understanding of the four project cases (see Table 1). Hence, an abundance of data was collected from reading newspaper articles, books, documents, reports and brochures, watching films and documentaries, browsing the internet for news and trivia (including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube), visiting project websites and information centers, listening to and reading secondary interviews, taping and studying speeches made by important project figures, as well as conversing with citizens and residents living in or next to the project areas. This was necessary in order to become truly familiarized with each project and its unique history and context.

(27)

14

the River project held in two different cities, Deventer and Zwolle; two phase transitions during the sub-project of tunnel-boring in the North-South Metro line of Amsterdam, including the official launches for phase 1 and phase 3; two milestone celebrations in the Railzone Delft project, one for reaching the end of the tunnel and the other for reaching the highest point of the new municipality building; and two project completions/deliveries for the Hanzeline railroad project, one internal held for the project organization and the other external held for the public. This selection was further determined by project accessibility, the accessibility and occurrence of planned ritual events in these projects, and on the permitted research time. Accessibility was granted by the community of practitioners, ‘Kennis in het Groot’ (KING) in which project managers of ‘Rijkswaterstaat’ (RWS), the executive body of the Dutch ministry of infrastructure and environment, and ProRail, the Dutch rail infrastructure provider, participate. The choice to select planned ritual events was for pragmatic purposes so I could gain access to various rituals at different times and project sites and be physically and experientially present as an attendee.

Project cases Transition Rituals

Room for the River (RR)

River expansion project

Project kick-off Deventer Project kick-off Zwolle North-South line Amsterdam

(NS) Subway/metro project

1st phase launch 3rd phase launch Railzone Delft (RD)

Underground railway project

Milestone end of tunnel Milestone top of building Hanzeline (HZ)

Aboveground Railway project

Internal project delivery External project delivery

Table 1: Project cases and ritual research sites

(28)

15

informative trip walking along the river with a project manager who explained how the project would change the public space, and another underground excursion which entailed a day trip to both the North-South line in Amsterdam and Railzone Delft for (student) engineers and constructors to explore the innovative techniques used for underground tunnel construction.

As a participant-observer, it was vital to be physically present to experience the project sites and spaces in order to gain a deeper understanding of the project context and process (see Photo 1 below). In this way, I could gain a ‘feel’ for organizational material by sensually experiencing spaces as I carried out fieldwork in the project organizations (Warren, 2008). By being physically present and active in the field of study, researchers themselves can become valid sources of data through their own aesthetic experiences, refining their capacity to empathize with others and imagining what it might be like to be them walking through and/or working in these same spaces (Warren, 2008). The ethnographic method used is regarded as multi-sited since I was present at various projects, ritual events, and project sites and spaces, including less tangible spaces such as the internet. Scholars claim multi-sited research is a development of ethnography that better suites our contemporary, globalizing societies and more complex research sites (Hannerz, 2003; Marcus, 1995).

Photo 1: Author doing fieldwork (taken by colleague)

(29)

16

to familiarize with the topic as they are the main organizers of ritual events in projects. Subsequently, 46 interviews were conducted with diverse project actors who organized, performed or attended the selected ritual. This included 18 interviews with communication advisors (‘Com. adv.’ on Table 2), 14 interviews with state officials and political representatives such as ministers, mayors, aldermen and state attorneys (‘VIPs’ on Table 2), as well as 12 interviews with project directors, managers, employees, project contractors and constructors (‘Builders’ on Table 2). Additionally, accounts from citizens, as ritual attendees, were collected via informal conversations during ritual events but have not been included in the interview sample due to scope and the focus on organizational actors. Because rituals can have different meanings for different participants I aimed for a mixed and large sample to ensure the reliability and validity of the findings. All interviews, ranging from 1 to 2 hours, were recorded, transcribed and translated from Dutch into English.

Table 2: Interview sample and details

Project(s) Transition ritual Interviews Project actors

Preliminary round

Various rituals 12 12 Com. adv.

Project RR Kick-off Deventer 7 2 Com. adv. 3 VIPs 2 Builders Kick-off Zwolle 7 2 Com. adv.

4 VIPs 1 Builder Project NS 1st phase kick-off 4 2 Com. adv.

1 VIP 1 Builder 3rd phase kick-off 6 3 Com. adv.

1 VIPs 2 Builders Project RD Milestone tunnel 3 1 Com. adv.

1VIP 1Builder Milestone building 3 1 Com. adv.

advisor 1 VIP 1 Builders Project HZ Internal project

(30)

17 General Analysis

According to Trice and Beyer (1984: 655) studying rituals in organizations has a methodological advantage compared to studying other cultural forms because they “provide culturally rich occasions for intermittent observation.” Further, they are bounded, visible, tangible and often accessible, and researchers can anticipate their occurrence as they are usually planned ahead. Important to mention is that seven of the eight rituals studied in the project organizations (except for the internal project delivery of HZ) were performed externally, involving the public such as (local) citizens and the media as spectators. This is because the cases studied are provincial and urban construction projects, embedded in multiple social and political contexts, and having considerable environmental and societal impacts (Manning, 2008; Bresnen et al., 2005b). Accordingly, to analyse rituals it is essential to link their meaning and practice to their context.

Specifically, to analyze rituals I first ‘zoom in’ (Nicolini, 2009) on these practices to observe how they are performed, followed by a process of ‘zooming out’ (Nicolini, 2009) to see how and why they are organized, to uncover their significance according to various project actors, and to relate this meaning to the specific history and context of each project. It must be stressed that rituals should not be studied in isolation; they are always ‘betwixt and in between’ (Turner, 1977). That is to say, though they are spatially and temporally specific, rituals always mark important moments in time, between the past and the future, often marking changes, transitions, and milestones during a life cycle (Martin, 2002). Therefore, it was key to consider the history, status, and prospect of each project organization (Engwall, 2003), and to relate these findings back to each ritual event. In short, rituals are always embedded in a larger context, and they often reflect and even influence the history, status, or prospect of an organization (Smith and Stewart, 2011).

(31)

18

interpretations of others (second order data collection), I also analyzed my own first-hand interpretations (first order data collection). A description of how I analyzed my data will be specified in the upcoming research papers presented in Chapters 3 - 6 in this dissertation.

Case descriptions: Introduction into the field The Room for the River project (RR):

The first case, the river expansion project ‘Room for the River’, is a national project to expand the IJssel River, thereby achieving a lower water level. The Netherlands is a country partly situated under sea level and therefore at a high risk for high water levels and flooding, especially considering that dikes erode over time and cannot withhold excess water by themselves. For the safety of Dutch inhabitants this project was started to achieve lower water levels by excavating floodplains along the IJssel River, by constructing new side channels and relocating and maintaining dikes. The IJssel River is expanded along six national provinces: Gelderland, Noord-Brabant, Overijssel, Utrecht, Zuid-Holland and Zeeland. In 2012, in the district Overijssel, the project made its official transition from the planning and preparation phase to the construction phase in two main cities that border the river: Deventer and Zwolle (see circled cities on Figure 1 below).

Figure 1: Map RR adapted by author (source: www.wgs.nl)

(32)

19

surrounding area were invited. Inside, an information market was set up with stands occupied by all collaborating project partners and organizations, such as the Deventer municipality and the contractor consortium ‘IJsselfront’, where attendees could collect information and ask questions. Local school children helped to guide attendees and food and drinks were provided throughout by a catering service. Around 16:00 all attendees were asked to sit down on the chairs set up in front of a podium staging a large projected screen in the center of the church. After an introductory speech by one of the organizers, a nature documentary was played about the natural reserve (the ‘IJssellanden’) around the river near Deventer. While playing this film, a local choir stood on stage singing songs about the river (see Photo 2 below). To portray the collaboration between different governments, several state officials came on stage to sanction the project launch. First the dike warden of WGS gave a speech to express the importance of this project for the people and the environment. Next the provincial representative of Overijssel came on stage with several school children who recited poetry they wrote about the river and the environment. Then, the alderman of Deventer came on stage to give a speech about the importance of this project for the people of Deventer and received a colorful poster from a student who depicted her interpretation of the river. The alderman also selected poems of three students who won the poetry competition they held for the project. For the grand finale a sand artist came on stage and artistically illustrated different images of the river and the nature area of the IJssellanden. Then he drew a heart in the sand and the dike warden and director of the contractor IJsselfront came on stage and symbolically signed their names in the sand to mark the official start of the project (see Photo 3 below).

(33)

20

The second kick-off was held in Zwolle on the 18th of June 2012, from 13:00 to 16:30. It was held at a party venue next to the IJssel River near Zwolle. Rather than inviting all residents of Zwolle, only those residing in or just around the project premises were invited, especially people living alongside the river. Members of the contractor consortium assigned to execute the project were also present. The event began with a presentation by a renowned meteorologist who spoke about climate change, rising water levels and the need for safety; hence the need for this project. Then a film was played in which several public officials visited the natural reserve around the river while sharing what the project means for them, including the minister of infrastructure and environment, the mayor of Zwolle, the provincial representative of Overijssel, and the dike warden of WGS. After the film was displayed, the minister was interviewed by the dike warden about why the project is necessary (see Photo 4 below). He responded that despite the difficulties and nuisances the project may cause, it is necessary for the safety of citizens. Afterwards, the provincial representative of Overijssel and the mayor of Zwolle were interviewed by the dike warden sitting back to back. Both comical and delicate questions were asked, such as a question about a national soccer tournament against Germany (as a joke), but then another about the residents who have to be displaced to literally make room for the river which was a sensitive subject. Then all attendees were asked to go outside where the official launch would be marked next to the river. All the important state officials, five people, stood around a round table in front of two crane machines along the river. There was a count down and together they pressed a red switch atop the table, after which a banner was raised by the two crane machines behind them reading “Together we start for a safe Zwolle” (see Photo 5). The audience clapped and pictures were taken by the media. Afterwards, food and drinks were provided for the attendees and everyone could converse and socialize with one another.

(34)

21 The North-South line Amsterdam project (NS):

The second case, the North-South line metro project, is a construction project in Amsterdam to build the first subway that travels directly from the north to the south of the city) along eight different stations, six of which are new (see line 52 from ‘Noord’ to ‘Zuid’ on Figure 2 below). In the North of Amsterdam, the metro will travel above the ground over an archway from Noord until it reaches the water. Then, it will go underneath the waterway (‘het IJ’) towards Central Station though a tunnel that was first constructed and then immersed under the water. Then, from Central Station to Europaplein the metro will continue to travel underground. In order to do this, the contractors Saturn and Herrenknecht drilled a tunnel 25 meters underneath the ground, with an eastern and western tube, using four different boring machines which have been named Gravin, Noortje, Molly and Victoria. Gravin bored the eastern tube of the tunnel from Central Station to Rokin, from March to June 2010 (phase 1), while Noortje bored the western tube, also from Central Station to Rokin, from August to October 2010 (phase 2). Subsequently, Molly bored the eastern tube from Europaplein to Rokin, from May 2011 until October 2012 (phase 3), while Victoria bored the western tube, also from Europaplein to Rokin, from December 2011 until February 2013 (phase 4).

Figure 2: Map NS (source: www.amsterdam.nl)

(35)

22

at Rokin. This grand event was held in a tent set up along the construction site underground, attended by a large group of project directors, managers, employees, stakeholders, political representatives, and the alderman of Amsterdam. This event signified the start of the first two phases of tunnel excavation, serving as the official launch for tunnel construction using TBMs. Starting in the party tent, the project director gave a speech to express the importance of the official launch of tunnel construction which would serve as the first line directly from the north to the south right through the heart of Amsterdam. Then below at the underground construction site, the Catholic priest would baptize the machines. First he baptized a small statue of Santa Barbara, the holy protector of tunnel and mine workers (see Photo 6 below). Subsequently, the names of the TBMs would be revealed. As the participants counted down, a giant poster was released from the first machine, reading ‘Noortje’ in big bold letters, followed by the release of the second poster from the second machine reading ‘Gravin.’ The names were female, as this belonged to the tradition, and were chosen by two school children from Amsterdam who were also present at the site. The priest then baptized the machines as he had baptized the statue with holy water. Afterward, the statue of Santa Barbara was carried by the ‘bore master’ and placed in a glass cupboard hanging on the wall next to the machines. Then, the boring manager and the alderman smashed a bottle of champagne against the first machine and then the second, after which confetti was cast down from above in celebration of this moment. At that time, above in the party tent, a group of engineers recited a traditional German mining song (see Photo 7) after which all attendees could further enjoy the event.

(36)

23

Amsterdam. This ritual followed the same script as the first, and was thus carried out in almost the exact same way. However, it was held at a different location (Europaplein), for a different machine, and for a different stage in the project (refer to fieldnotes p. 1 for ritual description).

Photos 8 and 9: NS launch phase 3 (taken by Gé Dubbelman)

The last phase-transition, the ritual in which ‘Victoria’ was baptized on the 15th of November 2011, was a more private ceremony (for the tunnel construction workers and managers only) making access too difficult. I was, however, able to observe and follow the event on film.

The Railzone Delft project (RD):

(37)

24 Figure 3: Map RD (courtesy of Railzone Delft)

In Delft, one sub-project recently finalized, was the completion of the eastern tunnel tube for the new railway. The project organization ritualized this milestone by creating an event – ‘Tour de Tunnel’ – on 28 June, 2013 where ten citizens were granted the opportunity (via Facebook and Twitter) to participate in an exclusive bike tour through the tunnel tube. At the information center, safety vests, helmets and bikes were given to the attendees who were then led to the tunnel construction site by the project manager. The event started in the tunnel where citizens, together with the alderman and the project manager, biked through the eastern tunnel tube. There was an arch of balloons at end of the tunnel to represent the finish line for the bikers (see Photo 10). After all participants completed their bike tour and crossed the finish line, the citizens celebrated the milestone together with the constructors and project manager by smashing a bottle of champagne against the wall of the tunnel. After this, cake and champagne was handed out for the attendees and the tunnel workers present at the site (see Photo 11). Then, a speech was given by the supervisor of tunnel construction during which he expressed the importance of this milestone, and the local media held some interviews with the participants.

(38)

25

Subsequently, on 7 October 2013 the project organization celebrated the completion of another sub-project when they reached the highest point of the new municipality building. This was also attended by a group of citizens who were granted participation, in addition to the alderman of Delft and representatives of the organizations who are responsible for the project such as the contractor, Dutch Railway, and ProRail (see Photo 12). During the event, attendees were given safety vests and helmets and climbed to the top of the building where they served (alcoholic) beverages for the celebration. Here, pictures could be taken of the construction site and the surrounding area. Then the alderman of Delft gave a speech in which she expressed what this new building would symbolize for the people of Delft, using words such as ‘innovation’ and ‘interconnection’. Subsequently, five flags representing the collaborating project partners (contractor Bam, municipality Delft, Dutch Railway, ProRail, and Railzone Delft) were raised by five representative members to epitomize their alliance and mark the milestone of reaching the highest point (see Photo 13).

Photos 12 and 13: RD milestone celebration reaching the top (taken by author)

The Hanzeline project (HZ):

(39)

26

this will probably be the last, significant railway to be built in the Netherlands. The project has been delivered by ProRail (responsible for the construction and maintenance of the entire railway net of the Netherlands) within the appointed budget and time frame, to the permanent operations team which runs the daily service of the railway and its trains sinceDecember 9th 2012.

Figure 4: Map HZ (courtesy of ProRail)

(40)

27

which they were to grab, open, and pour into the glass. Then everyone stood up for the moment that the project would officially be proclaimed as complete and transferred to the permanent operations team. There was a countdown and when the moment came the director and operations manager pressed a red button (see Photo 14). Everyone said cheers and drank their champagne (see Photo 15), followed by a big applause. Thereafter, the attendees were summoned to the dining and music area where they could eat, drink and celebrate together.

Photos 14 and 15: HZ internal project delivery (courtesy of ProRail)

(41)

28

their winning poem to the Queen. Then the Queen and attendees walked to a party venue next to the station where they could further celebrate the delivery of the project.

Photos 16 and 17: HZ external project delivery (taken by author)

Dissertation outline

In the following Chapter 2 of this dissertation, the theoretical framework will be provided. Here, ritual will be conceptualized by reviewing relevant theory in social science, organization science and project management. Subsequently, four main conceptual lenses will be introduced which have been selected over the course of this research to better comprehend the meaning of rituals in project settings and within particular sub-fields in organization studies. Specifically, a (1) practice lens, (2) strategy lens, (3) performative lens, and (4) sociomateriality lens have helped to develop theory in associated research fields. The purpose for selecting these lenses, how they are applied, and how they are related will be further elucidated in this chapter.

Chapter 3 is based on the first research article of this dissertation, ‘The ritualization

of the transitions in the project life cycle: A qualitative study of transition rituals in construction projects.’ This paper serves as an overview article about how, when and why transition rituals are practiced in construction projects. Specifically, the aim is to gain insight into the practice and meaning of transition rituals in the project life cycle. To accomplish this aim, the research question formulated is ‘what transition rituals can be discerned in the

project process, how and when are they practiced, and what do they mean for project participants?’ Data was used from all four project cases, including all 58 in-depth interviews

(42)

29

study mark and establish important transitions, milestones and deadlines in the life cycle of a project. This includes collective bargaining, signing contracts, (sub)project kick offs, (sub)project phase transitions, celebrating milestones, and (sub)project completions and deliveries. Furthermore, the paper demonstrates how rituals vary in terms of how they are practiced, with a certain focus (i.e. internally or externally), for particular target groups (i.e. Builders, VIPs, and Citizens), and at different levels (i.e. team/organizational, institutional, and societal). Moreover, the purposes attributed to rituals according to different actors are underlined such as enhancing commitment, gaining public support, and enacting transitions. The paper was presented at the 29Th EGOs colloquium in Montreal Canada in 2013, for sub-theme 38 on temporary and project-based organizing. The paper was then submitted to a special issue on temporal organizing in the International Journal of Project Management. The article was accepted and published in the International Journal of Project Management (see Table 4 below).

Chapter 4 is based on the second research article of this dissertation, ‘The point of no

(43)

30

the catalysis of a point of no return. This paper was presented at the 30th EGOs colloquium in Rotterdam in 2014, to sub-theme 43 on ‘Performativity as politics.’ Subsequently the article was submitted to a special issue on ‘the performativity of strategy’ in the journal of Long Range Planning, and has received a ‘revise and resubmit.’

Chapter 5 is based on the third research article of this study, ‘Machine baptisms and

heroes of the underground: Performing sociomateriality in the Amsterdam North-South line project.’ Whereas the first and second articles focused on all four project cases for the transferability of the findings, this article focuses on one particular case to provide a more in-depth and ethnographic account of the history and context of a particular project; the North-South line of Amsterdam. In the course of this research, it was found that the performance of rituals showcases important social and material elements that are interrelated – i.e. ‘sociomaterial’ – to construct certain meanings and realities. Here, sociomateriality is understood as a (re)configuration of entangled agencies, thereby discrediting the ontological separation between social and material entities. However, scholars claim this relational ontology is difficult to engage empirically. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to apply sociomateriality theory to exhibit how the social and material are entangled and (re)configured over time and in practice. Accordingly, the question formulated is “how are the

“social” and “material” entangled and (re)configured in a particular organization of study?”

To answer this question, the history of the project is traced since the 1960s to provide a rich account of the context, and by drawing from 10 in-depth interviews the narratives of project participants are shared throughout. In the findings, I exhibit the process of sociomaterial entanglement over time by focusing on this history of the case at the contextual level, the agency and performativity of the material at the organizational level, and the performance of sociomateriality via ritual performance at the practice level. This article was presented at the Annual Ethnography Symposium in Ipswich and submitted to the Journal of Organizational Ethnography to which it was accepted and is currently in press (see Table 3).

Chapter 6 is based on the fourth and last research paper ‘Rebalancing the disturbance:

VU Research Portal